The IRS admits that it targeted the Obama Administration’s right-wing political foes for extra scrutiny when they applied for non-profit status. You can’t trust government – except when they’re droning people.
In Govt We Trvst
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
6 Comments. Leave new
Right on, Ted – and as long as the sheer craziness, killing and creation of more enemies is far enough away (and out of the minds of most Americans), ishews like gays, guns and Benghazi will continue to dominate the memes of the mindless masses.
Bullshit.
The IRS went after rabidly anti-tax groups to make sure they weren’t improperly given tax-exempt status. They did their job (poorly, frankly, as several of these groups were given a tax-exempt status that they almost certainly did not deserve).
But even if the IRS was directed by Obama to target these groups (which there is no evidence for) so what?
Not that it wasn’t wrong, but I have no memory of the people who are screaming for Obama’s impeachment now screaming “Impeach” when Bush DELIBERATELY had the IRS go after liberal groups.
New rule: If you don’t complain when a President you like does something, you lose your right to complain when a President you hate with every fiber of your being does the exact same thing.
The whimsical groups say the IRS went after groups who said they weren’t gonna pay no taxes, which is their job. That’s NOT what happened. A group submitted a petition calling itself something with either the word ‘tea’ or ‘Patriot’ in the title and was rejected. They resubmitted with the word ‘green’ in the title and were immediately accepted. The applications were identical except for the title (ref. Peter Segal’s radio show, to which one may listen Saturday mornings or download and listen in iTunes).
***
As I’ve whined for years, the majority of American voters appreciate that drones are killing terrorists much more cheaply, and so are the greatest thing since American Democratic Sliced Bread!!! Only the Manchester Guardian, which some Commies think of as a major newspaper, prints as news the fact that 98% of those killed were NOT terrorists, just because independent academic observers have found this was true.
The always absolutely true and reliable (in Russian, Pravda) US press universally agrees that the drones are MUCH more selective that older methods, and have never killed a single innocent. Every man, woman, and baby killed by the drones was a proven terrorist on the verge of attacking America and inflicting worse damages than the 9/11/’01 attack (of course, that proof is Top Secret, so we can’t show it to you). Are we going to believe a cartoonist who uses artistic license, or the strictly factual US press? And not just Fox (always fair and balanced) but also the New York Times (always official propaganda for the US government, which would never lie to us).
@michael
Funny, a Google search turns up NO references to a group getting denied status when they used the words “tea party” and approved when they used “green” and yet a simple google search turns up dozens of articles about how NO tea Party group had their 501 status denied whatsoever.
Methinks Mr. Segal didn’t get his facts straight.
And quit whining about drones on articles that have nothing to do with them. It’s getting old.
quick everyone in Afganistan and Pakistan and Yemen and Iraq and Libya and … and … and … GO JOIN A 401C! If you even get attacked by a drone just claim you are being attacked for your political beliefs…hey wait…
Michael, just for the record, the «Guardian» hasn’t been known as the «Manchester Guardian» since 1959….
Henri